LFS 5.0, Chptr 6, GCC install: Is this a good result?

Shelton shelton at onr.com
Tue Jan 13 14:34:26 PST 2004


I had the same discrepancies from a host system using a 
celeron processor and redhat 7.3. meh, i shrugged it off.
i figured  the difference in percentage of tests that 
passed was small enough to be negligible.

i have also seen other posts to this list noting the same 
discrepancy.

you'll be okay.

Justin The Cynical wrote:
> I checked the GCC web site for test results, and found one compiled on
> i586-suse-linux-gnu(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-08/msg00
> 233.html in the .bin attchment). The results I have are identical except
> for the GCC tests. The GCC results on the GCC site show:
> 
> === gcc Summary ===
> 
> # of expected passes		21579
> # of unexpected failures	2
> # of expected failures		69
> # of unsupported tests		85
> /local/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.3.1
> 
> 
> ...while I have...
> 
> 
> === gcc Summary ===
> 
> # of expected passes		21577
> # of unexpected failures	2
> # of expected failures		65
> # of unsupported tests		85
> /local/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.3.1
> 
> 
> My results are from a Thinkpad 560x with a Pent 233MMX, 94604K RAM per
> top, with the host system being Debian (woody).
> 
> Call me paranoid, but are the differences something to worry about?  If
> so, any suggestions on what to check into?
> 
> Justin

-- 
~rick




More information about the lfs-support mailing list